104946 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

determination is based on this proposal 

to approve SIP revisions from the 

District that resolve the deficiencies that 

were the basis of our prior disapproval 

that triggered sanctions under section 

179 of the CAA. 

C. Proposed Action and Public 

Comment 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, the EPA proposes to approve 

the submitted rule because it fulfills all 

relevant requirements. We will accept 

comments from the public on this 

proposal until January 27, 2025. If we 

take final action to approve the 

submitted rule, our final action will 

incorporate this rule into the federally 

enforceable SIP. In addition, it will 

permanently stop the sanctions and 

Federal implementation plan (FIP) 

clocks started by our June 16, 2023 final 

action. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the MDAQMD Rule 1157, ‘‘Boilers and 

Process Heaters,’’ amended on 

September 25, 2023, which regulates 

NOX and CO emissions from industrial, 

institutional, and commercial boilers, 

steam generators, and process heaters, 

as described in section I of this 

document. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region IX Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Act. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely proposes to approve State 

law as meeting Federal requirements 

and does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. For that reason, this proposed 

action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 

21879, April 11, 2023); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it proposes to approve a State 

program; 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA. 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian Tribe has demonstrated that a 

Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

Tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with 

environmental justice (EJ) concerns to 

the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. Executive Order 

14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) 

builds on and supplements Executive 

Order 12898 and defines EJ as, among 

other things, ‘‘the just treatment and 

meaningful involvement of all people, 

regardless of income, race, color, 

national origin, Tribal affiliation, or 

disability, in agency decision-making 

and other Federal activities that affect 

human health and the environment.’’ 

The State did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of its SIP 

submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis 

and did not consider EJ in this action. 

Due to the nature of the action being 

taken here, this action is expected to 

have a neutral to positive impact on the 

air quality of the affected area. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of Executive Orders 

12898 and 14096 of achieving EJ for 

communities with EJ concerns. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: December 13, 2024. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30413 Filed 12–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2023–0242; FRL 12441–01– 

R2] 

Approval of Source-Specific Air 

Quality Implementation Plan; New 

York; Lehigh Cement Company LLC 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the State of New York’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) related to a Source-specific 

SIP (SSSIP) revision for Lehigh Cement 

Company LLC, located at 313 Warren 

Street, Glens Falls, New York (the 

Facility). The EPA is proposing to find 

that the control options in this SSSIP 

revision implement Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

with respect to nitrogen oxide (NOX) 

emissions from the relevant Facility 

source, which is identified as one 

Portland cement kiln (the Kiln). This 

SSSIP revision is intended to implement 

NOX RACT for the relevant Facility 

source in accordance with the 

requirements for implementation of the 

2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. This 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104947 

1Primary standards provide public health 

protection, including protecting the health of 

‘‘sensitive’’ populations such as asthmatics, 

children, and the elderly. Secondary standards 

provide public welfare protection, including 

protection against decreased visibility and damage 

to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. 

2The New York Metro Area is part of the greater 

nonattainment area New York-N. New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY–NJ–CT. 

3CAA 182(f)(1) also states: 

The plan provisions required under this subpart 

for major stationary sources of volatile organic 

compounds shall also apply to major stationary 

sources (as defined in section 7602 of this title and 

subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this section) of oxides 

of nitrogen. 

proposed action will not interfere with 

ozone NAAQS requirements and meets 

all applicable requirements of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 27, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket Number EPA–R02– 

OAR–2023–0242, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, e.g., Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available electronically 

through http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or 

withdrawn. The EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be CBI or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, such as 

the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Lin, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866, 212–637–3711, or by email at 

lin.stephanie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. The EPA’s evaluation of New York’s 

submission and RACT analysis 

III. Environmental Justice Considerations 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Ground Level Ozone Formation 

Ground level ozone is predominantly 

a secondary air pollutant created by 

chemical reactions that occur when 

ozone precursors, including nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), chemically react in 

the presence of sunlight.1 Emissions 

from industrial facilities are 

anthropogenic sources of ozone 

precursors. The potential for groundlevel ozone formation tends to be 

highest during months with warmer 

temperatures and stagnant air masses. 

Ozone levels are thus generally higher 

during the summer months, which is 

often referred to as ‘‘the ozone season.’’ 

In New York, the ozone season is 

generally considered to be between 

April 15 and October 15, while the nonozone season is generally considered to 

be between October 16 and April 14. 

Ozone Nonattainment 

A geographic area of the United States 

that is not meeting the primary or 

secondary National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) for ozone is 

described as a nonattainment area. 

Nonattainment areas are classified as 

either Marginal, Moderate, Serious, 

Severe, or Extreme. With respect to this 

proposed action, there are two relevant 

ozone NAAQS standards. First, on 

March 12, 2008, the EPA promulgated a 

revision to the ozone NAAQS, setting 

both the primary and secondary 

standards at 0.075 parts per million 

(ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time 

frame (2008 8-hour Ozone Standard). 

See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). 

Second, on October 1, 2015, the EPA 

lowered these standards to 0.070 ppm 

averaged over an 8-hour time frame 

(2015 8-hour Ozone Standard). See 80 

FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). 

The State of New York has two ozone 

nonattainment areas: (1) Jamestown, and 

(2) the New York Metro Area,2

consisting of the Bronx County, Kings 

County, Nassau County, New York 

County, Queens County, Richmond 

County, Rockland County, Suffolk 

County, Westchester County. Under 

CAA section 184, the State of New York 

is located within the Ozone Transport 

Region (OTR), which means that it is 

subject to statewide RACT 

requirements. This Facility is not 

located in an ozone nonattainment area, 

but it is still required to implement 

RACT because it is located within the 

OTR. 

Federal RACT Requirements 

RACT is defined as the lowest 

emission limit that a source is capable 

of meeting through the application of 

control technology that is reasonably 

available considering technological and 

economic feasibility. The CAA section 

182, Plan Submissions and 

Requirements, requires States with 

ozone nonattainment areas to include in 

their statewide SIPs, among other 

things, provisions to require the 

implementation of RACT. CAA section 

184(b)(2) 3 sets forth the requirement to 

establish control measures to implement 

RACT for major sources of VOC located 

in the OTR. For major sources of NOX, 

the CAA section 182(f)(1) also applies, 

‘‘The plan provisions required under 

this subpart for major stationary sources 

of volatile organic compounds shall also 

apply to major stationary sources (as 

defined in section 7602 of this title and 

subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this 

section) of oxides of nitrogen.’’ The 

State of New York is located within the 

OTR, and thus the State is required to 

implement RACT for all major sources 

of NOX within the State. RACT for a 

particular source is determined on a 

case-by-case basis, considering the 

technological and economic 

circumstances of the individual source. 

NYSDEC RACT Requirements 

The New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 

RACT regulations require applicable 

facilities to meet certain requirements, 

referred to as ‘‘presumptive RACT 

requirements.’’ These presumptive 

requirements generally require sources 

to implement emission limits, control 

efficiency requirements, specific control 

technologies, averaging plans, and/or 

fuel/raw material switching practices. In 

some instances, the presumptive RACT 

requirements may not be 

technologically or economically feasible 

for a certain source, and the State can 

make a source-specific RACT 

determination, which is submitted to 

the EPA as a SSSIP. The SSSIP should 

include the facility’s RACT plan that 

demonstrates how the facility will 

implement RACT. The SSSIP will also 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
104948 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

4The DAR–20 cost threshold is based on 1994 

dollars. State of New York relies on the U.S. 

Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

inflationary calculator to adjust the RACT economic 

feasibility threshold over time for inflation. See 

https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm. 

5On September 9, 2010, the EPA published the 

New Source Performance Standards for Portland 

Cement Plants (NSPS Subpart F). In that proposal, 

the EPA determined that SNCR was deemed to be 

the Best Demonstrated Technology (BDT) for NOX

in cement plants,’’ . . . we [the EPA] determined 

SNCR to be BDT and applied a control efficiency 

for the SNCR to the baseline uncontrolled level to 

determine the appropriate NOX level consistent with 

application of BDT . . . SNCR performance has 

been shown to range from 20 to 80 percent NOX

removal.’’ See 75 FR 54970. 

include the applicable CAA title V 

operating permit conditions that address 

RACT requirements. These permit 

conditions for the Facility will become 

part of the Federally enforceable SIP 

upon the EPA’s final approval of this 

SSSIP. 

Under existing NYSDEC RACT 

regulations, facilities are required to 

assess all technologically feasible 

control options that meet the State’s cost 

threshold. The cost threshold for 

NYSDEC RACT requirements is found 

under NYSDEC 2013 policy, ‘‘DAR–20 

Economic and Technical Analysis for 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT).’’ Under this policy, 

facilities must consider in their RACT 

determinations control technologies that 

remove VOC or NOX emissions up to a 

certain cost threshold, expressed in a 

dollar amount per ton of VOC or NOX

removed, which includes an inflationadjusted economic threshold.4

II. The EPA’s Evaluation of New York’s 

Revision and RACT Analysis 

This action relates to a SSSIP revision 

that concerns a Portland cement 

manufacturing and quarry facility 

operated by Lehigh Cement Company 

LLC, located in Glens Falls, New York. 

This Lehigh Cement SSSIP was 

submitted by NYSDEC on July 1, 2022, 

and is intended to implement NOX

RACT for the Kiln for purposes of the 

2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. This 

Lehigh Cement SSSIP replaces and 

withdraws the Lehigh Cement SSSIPs 

that were submitted by the State on 

September 16, 2008, and December 18, 

2013. In this SSSIP submittal, the EPA 

has reviewed the RACT determination 

for the Kiln for consistency with the 

CAA and the EPA regulations, as 

interpreted through EPA actions and 

guidance. The source at issue in this action is a 

short, dry preheater Kiln. NYSDEC 

RACT regulations establish RACT 

requirements for this source in 6 

NYCRR Subpart 220–1, ‘‘Portland 

Cement Plants,’’ last approved in the 

New York SIP by the EPA on July 12, 

2013. However, 6 NYCRR Subpart 220– 

1 does not establish presumptive NOX

RACT emission limits for cement kilns 

due to the uniqueness of cement 

manufacturing operations. Instead, 

under 6 NYCRR Subpart 220–1.6(b), the 

Facility must submit a RACT analysis 

along with the Air Title V Facility 

Permit application that proposes a 

RACT emission limit(s) and identifies 

the procedures and monitoring 

equipment to be used to demonstrate 

compliance with the proposed RACT 

emission limit(s). Here, NYSDEC 

determined that the Facility’s analysis 

adequately evaluated RACT. Such 

source-specific determinations must be 

submitted to the EPA as a SSSIP. 

In November 2010, the Facility 

conducted a NOX RACT analysis for the 

Kiln (Emission Unit 0–UKILN) 

specifically applicable under the 

Federally approved 6 NYCRR Subpart 

220–1.6(b). The RACT analysis included 

the following: (1) An identification of 

available NOX control technologies; (2) 

projected effectiveness of each control 

technology identified; (3) costs for 

installation and operation of each 

technology; and (4) determination of the 

control technology and emission limit 

selected as RACT. 

Lehigh installed and is currently 

operating a selective non-catalytic 

reduction (SNCR) system to meet NOX

RACT as a result of their 2010 NOX

RACT analysis.5 In addition, the 

Federally approved version of 6 NYCRR 

Subpart 220–1.7(d) requires owners or 

operators of a Portland cement kiln to 

install and operate a CEMS to monitor 

NOX emissions from the cement kiln in 

accordance with the provisions of 40 

CFR part 75, and to demonstrate 

compliance with the NOX RACT 

emission limit on a 30-day rolling 

average basis. A nationwide Federal consent decree 

(CD), Civil Action #5:19–cv–05688, was 

executed on November 18, 2020, due to 

violations that occurred, in pertinent 

part, at one or more of Lehigh Cement 

Company LLC’s (Lehigh) Portland 

cement plants. The obligations of the CD 

were negotiated between Lehigh and the 

U.S. Department of Justice (on behalf of 

EPA as well as non-federal jurisdictions, 

including the State of New York), and 

are binding. The terms of the CD imposed a lower 

emission limit (2.5 lbs NOX/ton clinker 

(30-day rolling average)) upon the Kiln 

that meets Best Available Control 

Technology (BACT), which is based on 

the maximum degree of control that can 

be achieved. The NOX emission controls 

and associated cost analysis from the 

November 2010 RACT analysis for the 

Kiln were determined to be acceptable 

as RACT by the NYSDEC. EPA is 

proposing to conclude that an August 

27, 2021, NOX RACT evaluation to 

support Lehigh’s Title V permit renewal 

application has successfully 

demonstrated that the emissions limit 

continues to be acceptable as RACT, 

with the RACT emission limit for the 

Kiln calculated as 2.9 lbs NOX/ton 

clinker (30-day rolling average). Since 

BACT is the maximum degree of control 

that can be achieved, BACT generally 

imposes more stringent requirements 

than RACT. Given that the BACT 

emission limit imposed by the CD is 

lower than the previously calculated 

RACT limit, the EPA is proposing to 

find that the BACT limit now represents 

RACT for this source. Here, the CD 

requires the Facility, beginning on or 

before May 18, 2021, to: (1) limit NOX

emissions from the Kiln to 2.5 lbs per 

ton of clinker produced with an 30-day 

rolling average; (2) install and 

commence continuous operation of an 

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction 

(SNCR) NOX control technology; and (3) 

install and operate a NOX Continuous 

Emissions Monitoring System (CEMS) at 

each stack, which collects emissions 

from the applicable kiln in accordance 

with the requirements of 40 CFR part 

60. 

To comply with the requirements 

outlined in the CD, Lehigh revised its 

Air Title V Facility Permit to contain 

two permit conditions (permit 

conditions 85 and 86) that include the 

NOX monitoring requirements and 

emission limitations as non-expiring 

obligations. A copy of the CD is located 

in the docket of this rulemaking, Docket 

Number EPA–R02–OAR–2023–0242, at 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

The intended effect of this sourcespecific SIP revision is to: establish the 

source-specific emission limit by 

incorporating the NOX emission limit 

imposed by the CD and associated 

monitoring requirements into the 

Facility’s source-specific SIP. 

The EPA is proposing to determine 

through this SSSIP action that the NOX

emission limit submitted by the State in 

this SSSIP for the Kiln is the lowest 

emission limit with the application of 

control technology that is reasonably 

available given technological and 

economic feasibility considerations. The 

respective NOX RACT emission limit is 

contained in the Facility’s Title V 

operating permit, 5–5205–00013/00058, 

under Conditions 85 and 86. This 

renewal permit was issued by the State 

on February 28, 2022, and expires on 

February 27, 2027. 

The Facility submitted a RACT plan 

for the emission limit requirements and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104949 

NYSDEC reviewed and approved the 

emission limit as adequately 

implementing RACT for the source. 

NYSDEC then submitted the sourcespecific SIP revision package at issue in 

this action for EPA approval, and the 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

respective emission limit as 

implementing RACT for this source. The 

emission limit for the Facility will 

become part of the Federally enforceable 

SIP upon the EPA’s final approval of 

this SSSIP. 

The EPA is proposing to determine 

that the proposed limit for Emission 

Unit 0–UKILN implements RACT 

because the Facility’s more stringent 

BACT NOX emissions limit imposed by 

the consent decree of 2.5 lbs NOX/ton 

clinker (30-day rolling average) is more 

stringent than the 2.9 lbs NOX/ton 

clinker (30-day rolling average) limit 

required to implement RACT for this 

source. 

III. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

The CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require an evaluation of 

environmental justice (EJ) 

considerations and/or concerns, and so 

the State of New York did not evaluate 

EJ concerns as part of its SSSIP 

submittal. The EPA evaluated EJ 

concerns for informational purposes 

only and is providing the following 

details for transparency about this 

rulemaking to the public. The EPA did 

not rely on this information to reach any 

decisions described in this action. The 

EPA created a Community Report 

(Report) using its EJ Screen, Version 2.3. 

The Report is contained in the EPA 

docket assigned to this Federal Register 

document. 

The Report addresses a 1-mile ring 

centered at the Facility. All thirteen EJ 

Screen environmental indexes were 

considered for the Report: (1) Particulate 

matter; (2) ozone; (3) nitrogen dioxide; 

(4) diesel particulate matter; (5) toxic 

releases to air; (6) traffic proximity; (7) 

lead paint; (8) superfund proximity; (9) 

risk management plan (RMP) facility 

proximity; (10) hazardous waste 

proximity; (11) underground storage 

tanks; (12) wastewater discharge; and 

(13) drinking water noncompliance. 

Both the EJ Indexes and the 

Supplemental Indexes were verified 

using the thirteen environmental 

indexes. The difference between the EJ 

and Supplemental indexes is that the EJ 

Indexes combine data on low income 

and people of color populations, 

whereas the Supplemental Indexes 

combine data on percent low-income, 

percent persons with disabilities, 

percent limited English speaking, and 

low life expectancy. We analyze both EJ 

Indexes and Supplemental Indexes 

because they offer different perspectives 

on community level vulnerability based 

on different factors. The EPA uses the 

National percentile for the Report 

results and not the State percentile since 

this SSSIP action is a Federal action. 

The EPA notes that any environmental 

index result that is 80 percentile or 

greater is relatively high compared to 

the United States population. The 

‘‘percentile’’ is what EJ Screen uses to 

compare the area of study to national 

figures. 

The results of the EPA’s 

environmental justice analysis indicated 

that the following National 

Supplemental Indexes were above the 

80th percentile: Superfund Proximity 

and RMP Facility Proximity. 

In addition, via EJScreen, the Facility 

was determined to be in a Justice40 

area. In January 2021, President Joe 

Biden issued Executive Order (E.O.) 

14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at 

Home and Abroad. Section 223 of the 

E.O. established the Justice40 Initiative 

which directs 40 percent of certain 

Federal investments to flow to 

disadvantaged communities. 

To understand the indexes that are at 

or higher than 80th percentile, and the 

Justice40 categories that represent Glens 

Falls, NY, refer to Lehigh Cement 

Environmental Justice Considerations 

and Lehigh Cement EJ Screen 

Community Report June 4, 2024 in 

docket assigned to this Federal Register 

document. 

IV. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to approve this 

current source-specific revision because 

the limit included in the SSSIP is 

demonstrated to implement RACT for 

the Kiln. Based on an analysis of this 

source-specific SIP revision, the EPA 

proposes to approve Lehigh Cement 

Company LLC’s operation under the 

NOX emission limit approved by 

NYSDEC for the Facility’s Kiln. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, the EPA is 

proposing to include regulatory text that 

includes incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is proposing to 

incorporate by reference revisions to 

Lehigh Cement Company LLC Title V 

operating permit conditions 85 and 86 

as described in section II of this 

preamble. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 2 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act and 

applicable Federal regulations. 42 

U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, 

in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this 

action merely approves State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 

21879, April 11, 2023); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it approves a State program; 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

Tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
104950 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies 

to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with 

environmental justice (EJ) concerns to 

the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. Executive Order 

14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) 

builds on and supplements E.O. 12898 

and defines EJ as, among other things, 

the just treatment and meaningful 

involvement of all people, regardless of 

income, race, color, national origin, or 

Tribal affiliation, or disability in agency 

decision-making and other Federal 

activities that affect human health and 

the environment. 

The New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation did not 

evaluate EJ considerations as part of its 

SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

EPA performed an EJ analysis, as is 

described earlier in the section titled, 

‘‘EJ Considerations.’’ The analysis was 

done for the purpose of providing 

additional context and information 

about this rulemaking to the public, not 

as a basis of the action. In addition, 

there is no information in the record 

upon which this decision is based 

inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 

12898/14096 of achieving EJ for 

communities with EJ concerns. 

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Lisa Garcia, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30582 Filed 12–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2022–0134; 

FXES1111090FEDR–256–FF09E21000] 

RIN 1018–BG93 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Significant Portion of the 

Range for the Northern Distinct 

Population Segment of the Southern 

Subspecies of Scarlet Macaw 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Prior analysis and 

determination; opening of comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, are opening a public 

comment period on a 2023 analysis 

regarding the significant portion of the 

range for the northern distinct 

population segment of the southern 

subspecies of the scarlet macaw (Ara 

macao macao). The analysis was 

conducted as part of a listing 

determination under the Endangered 

Species Act for the distinct population 

segment. Previously submitted 

comments related to the analysis need 

not be resubmitted, as they are already 

incorporated into the public record and 

will be fully considered. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or before 

January 27, 2025. Comments submitted 

electronically using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, 

below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. 

eastern time on the closing date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter FWS–HQ–ES–2022–0134, which 

is the docket number for documents 

related to the analysis and listing 

determination. Then click on the Search 

button. You may submit a comment by 

clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’ 

(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 

to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: 

FWS–HQ–ES–2022–0134, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

We request that you send comments 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all comments on https:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see Public 

Comments, below, for more 

information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rachel London, Manager, Branch of 

Delisting and Foreign Species, 

Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803 (telephone 703–358–2171). 

Individuals in the United States who are 

deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have 

a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, 

TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 26, 2019, we, the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 

published in the Federal Register a final 

rule under the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) (84 FR 6278; hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘the 2019 rule’’). The 2019 

rule was the outcome of a rulemaking 

proceeding that began with a proposed 

rule (77 FR 40222, July 6, 2012) and a 

revised proposed rule (81 FR 20302, 

April 7, 2016). 

The 2019 rule revised the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in 

title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (at 50 CFR 17.11(h)) to add 

the northern subspecies of scarlet 

macaw (A. m. cyanoptera) as an 

endangered species, the northern 

distinct population segment (DPS) of the 

southern subspecies (A. m. macao) as a 

threatened species, and the southern 

DPS of the southern subspecies (A. m. 

macao) and subspecies crosses (A. m. 

cyanoptera and A. m. macao) as 

threatened species due to similarity of 

appearance. The 2019 rule also added 

protective regulations to 50 CFR 17.41 

pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act for 

the northern and southern DPSs of the 

southern subspecies and for subspecies 

crosses (hereafter, ‘‘the 4(d) rule’’). For 

a more thorough discussion of the 

taxonomy, life history, distribution, and 

the determination of listing status for 

scarlet macaws under the Act, please 

refer to the Species Information section 

in the 2019 rule. 

In the 2019 rule, we determined that 

the northern DPS of the southern 

subspecies of scarlet macaw meets the 

definition of a threatened species 

because it was likely to become in 

danger of extinction within the 

foreseeable future throughout all of its 

range. At that time, we followed our 

Final Policy on Interpretation of the 

Phrase ‘‘Significant Portion of Its 

Range’’ in the Endangered Species Act’s 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1